I have previously posted a pink frit and thorn foot vase which caused some difficulties with attribution - the vase is at http://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/55453-frit-and-thorn-vase?in=user
The first picture shows that vase with a new arrival.
I have just received the second vase, and I am hoping it will help with the identification. To my eye and hand, the two vases are made of the same frit. They have the same degree of roughness in the hand, the same colour, and gradation from white at the base to deep pink at the top. Both are cased, pink inside, clear outside. Both have applied clear feet, one thorn the other not. Both came from England - UK eBay, but different sellers.
I still have no clear idea whether these are Bohemian, and if so Kralik (as previously suggested by one poster - but Obscurities said it did not strike him as Kralik, which may tell you all you need to know), or English, so I will post in Bohemian glass and British glass in the hope of getting the widest range of opinions. I'd really love to know more about these vases!

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoCharcoal thank you - great spot! The blue frit does look similar, similar thorn foot to vase 1 and to top it off the foot style of the second as a rim decoration.
Only problem - Obscurities is pretty sure these 2 are not Kralik, but he posted that he thought the blue one was. What am I missing?

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoThank you Charcoal. I hope you will forgive questions, since there is a debate on this. There is no intention to offend, or doubt your knowledge, especially since I have to admit I don't know who you are, or your background! I freely admit I have no knowledge or background in glass - just a genuine desire to learn.
Obscurities thinks these are not Kralik, and is convinced in that view by vase 2 on this post and his own piece. I have seen his reasoning and know his provenance. He has done a lot of work on Kralik, handled a lot of pieces and seen photos of a lot more. It may be that you are the same, but in my ignorance I don't know. Would it be possible for you to explain your reasoning, and the basis of your views, so that I can understand why you have each reached diametrically opposed views?

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoHere's the link to French eBay to the yellow frit in the same metal mount as the pieces in Obscurities' post: http://cgi.ebay.fr/vases-verre-irise-1900-etain-jungendstil-pallme-konig--/350560403198?pt=FR_YO_MaisonJardin_Decoration_ObjetsdeDecoration&hash=item519f073efe#ht_500wt_1033
The metal mounts on these pieces are interesting. The retro-fitting of metal mounts described by Charcoal fits most of my metal mounted pieces - the metal is "tied" to the body for want of a better word, and slides both around and up and down. The glass is clearly not shaped to the mount but vice versa.
That does not seem to be the case with these frit/papillon pieces. They seem to have blown grooves for the mounts, in just the right places,so they will not slide up and down. Does that not support the idea of one house using these mounts, and perhaps shaping the glass to the known dimensions of the mounts rather than retro-fitting? I'm not suggesting they were blown into the mounts, just that the creator knew where the ties would be and made allowances for that when creating the glass.

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoFor the yellow piece in the same unusual metal mount as those on Obscurities' post search French eBay for verre irise Pallme Konig jugendstil in the petites annonces - I'm not allowed to post the link here. Item no 350560403198.
I find the metal mounts on those pieces interesting. If you look carefully at the yellow and the two examples on Obscurities' post, these pieces seem to be shaped exactly to fit the metal mounts. I'm not suggesting they were blown into the mounts, more that the creator knew the dimensions of the mounts when creating the glass and allowed for them, rather than the more usual "retro-fitting".
In my limited experience that is unusual for metal body mounts.
I have a couple of metal mounted pieces (one already posted) where the metal around the body is "tied" on to the glass, but could be removed without any sign from the shape of the glass that it was mounted. Indeed, the mounts slide not just around but up and down. I have a piece in a metal "basket" mount that is the same. Looks exactly like the retro-fitting Charcoal describes.
That is not at all like these pieces, to my eyes, where there seem to be grooves - for want of a better word -for the metal ties, in just the right places. They stop the mounts sliding up and down. Would that not tend to support the idea that one glass house used these mounts, and shaped the glass to fit? So what do you think? Am I barking up the wrong tree, or seeing things that aren't there?

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoInteresting thought. They don't look cut off to me. The backs, and indeed the fronts, on the shorter papillon seem finished properly, as they are on the pink and the yellow. Perhaps Obscurities can clarify.
Wouldn't it be easier, and more cost-effective, thus more commercial, to blow the glass to fit the metal than to cast each piece of metal individually to fit each piece of glass? Or if retro-fitting simply to ask for glass without grooves, as we see on other pieces? The very fact they fit suggests they were made for each other, or very limited production, doesn't it? After all, this is not costly sterling silver mounting individually designed for the specific vase. Maybe they are different batches of metalwork? I simply assumed there were two moulds, one metal one glass, designed to match up. Perhaps the metal design changed over time ...

Londonloetzlearner, 5 years agoThank you Charcoal!
Info on the metal producers, if it existed, might be a very valuable tool in any number of ways. I've been wondering about this with regard to the pieces with English sterling silver mounts. We don't have anything like the Butler Bros catalogues, as far as I am aware - but I wonder whether there might be information on the silversmiths that might lead to more info on the glass. Trouble is tracking down some of the provincial marks to start with - especially with the silver rims which are so often battered and rubbed almost to being unreadable.